If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Here's a revolutionary idea, let's make the weekend HT a true test of a finished gun dog.

1. In at least one triple marking series, a blind retrieve shall be made before the marks are picked up but after all three marks have fallen. The blind shall be longer than any of the three marks and between the falls to simulate a lively cripple.

2. At least one marking series shall have the working dog positioned at least 10 feet from the handler.

3. At least one series will require the dog to work from a boat, field blind or other station commonly used in hunting situations.

I'm sure there are other suggestions to increase the realism and difficulty of the weekend test.

Only true finished dogs could earn a mh then and mnh would become a real honor.

Here's an example of what is driving the problem: This is from a local hunt test and one MH stake out of two. The other had very similar statistics.

Master A: 42 dogs entered.

22 dogs who are professionally trained by very well respected trainers who travel to warmer climates failed. Of the 20 who passed, I know 14 were also professionally trained. 3 I don't know their affliations or training background. Few were Am handled.

Is this what needs to happen to edit the number of dogs qualifying for the Master National? Is this healthy for the sport? Personally, I feel my odds of winning a field trial ribbon are better than passing a "standard".

the only TRUE way to bring these numbers down to a manageable amount is for each region to hold a pre-national qualifier event over a 3 day weekend....IMO.... this would benefit everyone....here you can ween out most of the dogs that just Squeaked through the qualifing system....then the MN event would TRULY be a test of the very best and most deserving dogs...... just my .02

My young dog has a chance at getting 6 or 7 Master passes in time to qualify for the West Coast MN next year. If we do, we'll go and because of the MN being held in my region, we're going to try like heck and spend the entry fees and travel time to try and qualify. But I'm sure as heck NOT going to make the effort for the MNs in the other 3 regions.
Summary: I'll only spend the money once every four years.

If there was a regional MN every year, I'd spend the money every year to make the effort to qualify. And if we happened to pass the regional, I'd probably feel special and spend the money to go the National at least 3 times. Summary: That's four times the amount of money for the MNRC, local clubs and AKC.

The more folks I talk with seem to have less interest in the MN than before. Mainly due to the politics of the event and club in general. I can count 5 folks I know and train with occasionally who used to have their main goal be getting to the MN.

I don't think the plate seems as shiny as it used to be.

Paul, do you think a reason to the feelings your friends have is that they feel the MN is "watered down"? With so many dogs now qualifying perhaps the prestige of the plate is not what it once was?

"and between the falls to simulate a lively cripple." Only way to do that is have a live duck running around. Then how would the handler put the dog on it since my experience in the field has me usually not knowing where the crip went after I have shot the triple.

Like the ideas however unrealistic it seems on first read. I will think on it a bit.

I like #2 but #3 has the "field blind" layout? in play and we know how that is perceived by some.

Hunting situation? How many handlers hunt? Of the 15 or 20 handlers I am around the most there are 3 of us that hunt at all.

Maybe the way to limit the MNHT numbers is to open it only to owners who have three years straight of hunting licenses in their possession. To include those owners who put their dogs on a pro truck for the duration.

Last edited by jacduck; 04-20-2013 at 01:49 PM.

John Cottenham aka jacduck in many circles before the internet

"Duck hunter's minds are like concrete. All mixed up and permanently set."

Greetings: All of these posts are good. However, the regionals, split Pro/Am, preliminary, raise scores, raise number of qualifications etc have been proposed in the past. And in the past all were voted on at the MN annual meetings. Many many clubs had pros serve as their delegates. The pros will not vote for something that will deminish their pay check. Not anti pro but the sport will never be a true "amateur" sport until all the delegates are amateurs with amateur interests.

Paul, do you think a reason to the feelings your friends have is that they feel the MN is "watered down"? With so many dogs now qualifying perhaps the prestige of the plate is not what it once was?

No, I think what the major complaints in discussion is that you have to have a full time professional train your dog to pass a weekend test. What's become watered down is the flood of mini-master national weekend tests mentality. Even the guys that work hard on the weekends and have great marking dogs who complete tests are being penciled out after honestly completing the work to the written standard.

Where can the only blame lie with the current mentality of the AKC HT? I don't think I'll run a hunt test this year. I know quite a few others who feel the same way. A good example is a local spring hunt test. Last year, 69 Master Hunters were entered. The event closes on Monday and right now only 22 are entered. I know of at least 5 folks I train with who aren't entering or planning on running many hunt tests this year. Everybody says, "no, MN does not and will not be affecting our local tests, we won't put on mini-master nationals". Then, the big push comes to bring in judges who are current or up and coming master national judges? Did I miss something here? Kind of a lot of double speak going on in my opinion.